The White House is spoiling for a fight, this time with Iran. They're making all the noises that preceded the illegal conquest of Iraq. Iran, we're told, is a threat to the world. It was, after all, pronounced a full member of the Axis of Evil by George W. Bush hisself - case closed.
Now there's the business about Iran arming Iraqi Shiite militias. A real threat if there ever was one. But wait, they're the bunch that go after the Sunni insurgents, the other bunch, the group that actually does target American soldiers, the guys who get their support from Saudi Arabia. Why isn't Bush bombing the living hell out of Riyadh? I guess that's because the House of Saud and the House of Bush are bosom buddies, eh?
To stir things up, Mr. Bush has now ordered a third, carrier battle group into the Persian Gulf. Three fleet carriers is pretty much unprecedented and observers have noted that on every occassion US carriers have deployed to the Gulf, save one, there's been combat. So, judging by past experience and the deployment of three carrier battle groups, the odds are better than even that the Bush/Cheney regime has already made its mind up to attack.
Hillary Mann, the former National Security Council director for Iran and Persian Gulf affairs warns of what's coming, "They intend to be as provocative as possible and make the Iranians do something (the United States) would be forced to retaliate for."
Paul Krugman, writing in today's New York Times, says the White House has already got its intelligence cooker turned up high. He points out that Abram Shulsky, the guy who headed Rumsfeld's intelligence warper on Iraq, is now back in business heading the Pentagon's Iran directorate. Let's see - the guy put in charge of gaming the Iraq intelligence, instead of being fired in disgrace, is now assembling the Iran intelligence. What does that sound like?
Krugman also sees a reason for keying so much attention to Iranian ordinance found in Iraq and tying it to the deaths of US soldiers. Bush isn't about to get Congressional authorization to launch a war against Iran, simply ain't going to happen. But, if he can "earmark" the attacks as just part of the already authorized Iraq war then he can claim he doesn't need the approval of Congress.
Is attacking Iran stupid? No more stupid than invading Iraq.
4 comments:
I guess the combination of threatening to wipe Isreal off the map (while engaging in a massive public desplay of building the case why Jews are evil incarnate),
and attempting to develop the means to carry that out,
should be no problemo.
Well, there's one little problem. It's the 200-odd nukes maintained in the arsenals of the Israeli Defence Forces. The Iranian leadership aren't fools. They know there will be nothing left for them to govern should they even attempt to launch a nuclear attack against Israel.
Mutually assured destruction.
Hmmmmm, coming from a region in which young men willingly strap on a bomb and die to take out a single bakery,
maybe that whole "careful you might die too" threat may not be so pursuasive.
But hey, you might be right, and after all, your only gambling on the lives of 6 million Jews.
Again, no problemo.
I don't get what anonymous is pushing at. I don't believe the majority of people believe "no problemo" regarding Jew or anyone else so cut that crap.
Post a Comment